Developmental Trajectories of Conduct Problems and Cumulative Risk from Early Childhood to Adolescence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pathways into and out of conduct problems differ by circumstances experienced since infancy. There is a research gap in understanding how these developmental patterns vary according to the timing and persistence of risk and whether there are differences across ecological domains. This study examines variations in trajectories of conduct problems between ages 3 to 14 years and associated child, family and socio-economic risk factors from ages 9 months to 14 years, drawing on the UK Millennium Cohort Study (n = 17,206, 49% female), a nationally representative longitudinal study of children born between 2000/02. Group-based modeling was used to identify four distinct trajectories of conduct problems: low (56%), persistent high (8%), childhood-limited (23%) and adolescent-onset (13%). All three problem pathways were associated with high levels of exposure to risk, particularly early socio-economic and persisting child and family risks. However, while for the persistent and adolescent-onset pathways, exposure to higher levels of family and child risks continued through adolescence, it receded for the childhood-limited trajectory. The effects of early socio-economic disadvantage persisted for those on the adolescent-onset trajectory, highlighting the importance of early markers for this later onset group. Maternal smoking in pregnancy continued to be a significant predictor for all three conduct problem groups, even up to age 14 years. The findings indicate that different influences and processes may explain diverse pathways of conduct problems. This offers insights into who and what might be targeted and when might be the most effective developmental window for intervention.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".